Oh yes, life goes on--for now :shrug:
Printable View
Oh yes, life goes on--for now :shrug:
If the “attribution science” boys & girls get their way and get trials on the damages caused by big corporations producing fossil fuels, against the damages would not those defendants be entitled to an offset for the beneficial value they provided? If so, and that is only proper, the benefits of fossil fuel would be orders of magnitude greater than any damages, thus no recovery. If the eco-chondriacs ever got their way, we would all be dodging horse manure while we tied our steads to the hitching post out front and moved our goods with wagons.
Those "eco-chondriacs" are not much different than the deniers---just on the other side of the street.
I have been mostly poking fun at you--and I will stop now----but I have said this before and will say it again. I don't know if our bad habits are responsible for climate change (or whatever the current vanilla term is)but I am not ready to bet against it and the majority of proposed fixes are things we should be doing anyway. To ignore good practices, simply for convenience, is irresponsible.
The good practice we are ignoring is nuclear power.
What is irresponsible is trying to kill that which has sustained and advanced us for a couple hundred years in favor of vastly more expensive immature technologies in fear of computer predictions which fail over and over.
You offer assumptions that are not based on fact---but I'm not going to spend time debunking them.
You will have explain your comment.
Im not good at explaining :shrug: , but will start by noting that my comment is directed at the "why not" part.
I worry that the data, which I assume will come from a bunch of goobermint agencies, NGO's, and academics (bankrolled by lawyers), will be subject to manipulation. Picture some ambulance chaser producing "data" from some air monitor, read by a stoned graduate student for his/her thesis, that you have no way of knowing is accurate or even exists. Don't ask me to trust them.
On edit: I see this used against dry cleaners, printers, auto repair shops and myriad other mom and pop's not just big business like the pollution the amazon truck causes driving by my house.
We have downwinders here from our nations adventure with "nucular" weapons. I don't want a nuke plant anywhere near me. Call me an enviro wacko:shrug:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/u...te-change.html
“Attribution science” lawsuit by the City of Baltimore filed in a state court in Baltimore, which SCOTUS left to proceed in that venue. Good luck with that jury oil companies.
Thank you Curt.
Speaking of power outages, maybe I can sue PG&E over my smokers cough? Should I care what power costs in CA?
Everyone is going to say, we need to reduce emissions because it is a good thing to do. Stop using fossil fuel, wind, solar and nuc are the way to go.
Fine, give up your A/C , your car and everything that makes you comfortable and able to live into your eighties. Lets go back to early deaths and back breaking living conditions.
However, before we do that. Think for a minute, what other Country is going to go along with that ?. The U.S. alone ,, no matter how much we change to reliance on “ eco safe “ power , cannot come close to “ saving the world “.
Continue to explore alternative methods YES . But don’t pretend that we alone are going to halt any type of global environmental change .